Is christianity true?
The evidence is conclusive.
Will you investigate?
BOOKMARK THIS SITE NOW
(CTRL+D)
FOR QUICK REFERENCE AND EASY SHARING
WHY THIS SITE?
A Roadmap for Evaluation
Seeking to prove Christianity? Disprove Christianity? Not sure?
- Regardless of your starting point, the issues presented here must be addressed in order to reach a conclusion about the truth of Christianity.
- This site provides a framework for further study for those who are genuinely curious about Christianity.
- Will you take an honest look at the evidence? Will you examine your own beliefs? What if the results are not what you expect?
WARNING: THIS MAY CHANGE YOUR LIFE!
WHAT'S HERE?
THIS SITE IS HERE FOR YOU!
With the abundance of information available today, why is it so hard to find what you are looking for?
- This site was born from a passion to create a useful tool for those seeking the truth about the Christian faith.
- A map was needed to organize the relevant information (and misinformation) in a way that it can be successfully accessed and processed.
- A wide variety of key factors have been condensed into manageable groupings and brief summary statements.
- This site will grow in breadth and depth as additional content, links, and resources are added.
- Intended to become the go-to resource for those in search of relevant information on the truth of Christianity.
TOPICS
Knowledge
Can We Really Know Anything?
Of course we can know things. That’s why you are here reading this! You know you exist. You know you are seeking information. You know you just might find something useful; that’s why you are looking! Some will make the claim that we can’t really know anything. It’s interesting that the people who insist that knowledge is unattainable certainly claim to know a lot about it.
Beliefs
Beliefs are those things we accept as being true. It’s important to note that truth exists outside of beliefs. Truth is not impacted by our level of belief or commitment to it. Believing something that is false does not make it true. Similarly, rejecting something that is true does not, in any way, make it false.
When it comes to religious beliefs, things often get majorly jumbled up. Sincerity of belief is frequently offered as the greatest evidence of religious validity. Additionally, many people (including Christians) either don’t know what they believe, don’t know why they believe it, or believe it for the wrong reasons. Don’t let their confusion become yours. You must find a way to get to the truth, despite the challenge. (See also: Truth)
What is Truth?
Although beliefs are real, not everything we believe is true. The difference between beliefs and truth is crucial. I’m sure you can think of an example where someone thought they knew something – they believed it, but they were wrong. Of course, we all know we have done this too, where we thought we knew something to be a fact, but were mistaken. These examples highlight the distinction between belief and truth.
Proving Christianity is all about pursuing truth. Truth exists whether or not anyone acknowledges it or accepts it. We are seeking after things that are real and factual, not those things which are merely desired or accepted. Are you more interested in the amount of belief, or the amount of truth, in a given topic? How can you separate the two? (See also: Knowledge)
Morals
Good and Evil
Have you ever heard someone say they are a good person? Or have you declared anything as being either good or evil? What is the basis for this judgment? For Christians, the basis for judging good and evil is governed by God and spelled out in the Bible. But even more significantly, Christians believe in being created in the image of God, with moral judgments placed inside each person. For the atheist, there is no justification for declaring anything either good or evil. If life initially began simply by chance, and humans are merely evolved animals, then good and evil has no basis.
Think about it, those concepts of right and wrong ONLY make sense if a God exists. Without God, we are just random particles making arbitrary rules for ourselves. We all have an innate sense of good and evil; ask yourself where this comes from. What is the source?
The Beginning...No, Before That
The definite beginning of the universe was once resisted by science, though espoused by Christians. Eventually, the evidence proved overwhelming. We have known for many years that scientific evidence indicates the universe had a definite beginning. This fact has been established by the best scientists in the world, and each year brings new findings that further proves the point. This definite beginning is commonly referred to as the big bang. Science has studied the history of the universe starting from this big bang. However, science is incapable of studying what caused the big bang, as it is, by definition, outside of time and space.
The big bang itself is presented as the cause of the universe. But is it really fair to trace the expansion of the universe back to the earliest point in time and call this the cause? Science may be able to address how the universe expanded from its initial state, but it cannot address why it started in the first place. Science may be able to recognize and explain the intricacies of the natural world, but it cannot address why there is something rather than nothing at all. While beyond the reach of science, it isn’t beyond the reach of philosophy and logic. We all know that effects have a cause. The big bang is an effect, not a cause.
What caused the big bang? It must have been something outside of time and space, since time and space did not yet exist. The natural world was not yet formed, nor did any materials, matter, or energy exist with which to create it. By definition, this first cause must be outside of nature, also known as supernatural. Despite boastful claims, no other theory has offered a compelling alternative. If you hear one, investigate it thoroughly, reviewing input from both advocates and critics. Be sure to search for truth, not comfort, in the theory.
Evidence in Nature
Nature itself makes a compelling case for Christianity. The precision of the universe, the irreducible complexity of life, the delicate balance of forces that sustain life, and the fact that something exists rather than nothing, all point to the existence of God. The observable world presents a multitude of reasons to believe that something or someone is responsible for this.
You can follow a number of different approaches to dig into this deeper. For example, the second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of an isolated system, such as the universe, only increases and does not decrease. The law has many applications, such as describing how systems move only from order to disorder without being acted upon by outside forces. When applied to the closed system of the entire universe, it necessitates a divine creator. Another example of an area where you can dive deeper into nature is by studying the workings of the solar system, planet earth, or life on earth. There is a lot of interesting study that can be done in this area, producing useful results for your understanding of the evidence nature presents.
Christians are not afraid of the deep scientific study of these aspects of nature, because there is not an inherent conflict between nature and Christianity. Have you investigated nature for all it’s worth? Have you deeply and honestly evaluated evidence from a variety of sources? If not, why not do it now?
Micro vs. Macro
When people say they believe in evolution, what do they mean? The word evolution is used to refer to a wide variety of processes in living organisms. A primary distinction is between the terms micro-evolution and macro-evolution.
Microevolution refers to the variations within kinds; these are the changes that occur within a particular family of plants or animals. Microevolution is not controversial, has been observed, and is rarely a contested topic. On the other hand, macroevolution refers to transitions between kinds; these are the hypothesized changes by which one family of creature is converted into another. Macroevolution is solely based on conjecture, has not been observed, and is not supported by the fossil record.
Unfortunately, these two definitions of evolution are frequently used without distinction, with evidence for microevolution being used to justify macroevolution. The mix-and-match between the evidence and the theories is sometimes an intentional approach to confuse the issue and appear to present solid evidence for a theory that has none.
This confusion has reduced the clarity of the discussion. Have you sorted through the evidence for yourself, or have you (like many) accepted that the evidence must clearly support the theory of evolution without evaluating the validity of the claim? It would be worth your time, and you may be surprised by what you find.
Darwin
In his famous book, The Origin of Species, Charles Darwin presents an interesting thought: “The number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed on the earth, (must) be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory.”
There was concern that the fossil evidence was lacking, but the expectation was the additional evidence would be found in the coming years. It’s been over 160 years since these thoughts were published, and the evidence supporting Darwin’s hypothesis has not been produced. In fact, the exact concern Darwin expressed has become even more clear, the fact that these finely graduated transitional chains of life are nowhere to be found.
Have you considered that for Darwin’s theory of macroevolution to be true, humans would not only be related to apes, but also related to spiders, redwoods, whales, scorpions, dandelions, grub worms, dinosaurs, ducks, apples, corn, and the flu virus? There’s a lot of writing out there on the topic of evolution. Check some out for yourself, again, making sure to read both sides of the argument.
What Evidence Would You Require To Prove Christianity?
What kind of evidence would you expect from an all-knowing God? What expectations would you dream up if you were to craft your own plan for proving to the world that God exists and that Jesus is God who came in the form of a man? Here’s a pretty good list to get you started:
- God should personally introduce himself to his creation. He should meet with the humans he made and talk with them so they know who created them and how they came into being.
- He should explain to them their purpose in life, and provide instruction on how to live.
- If he has expectations for what we should and should not do to please him, he should let us know.
- These lessons should be recorded for future generations to reference.
- If people mess up, he should provide a plan to make it right again. After all, he’s the one who created people to begin with, and people aren’t perfect. He would know we would fail at some point. Knowing we would fail, and yet providing no course of reconciliation would just be cruel.
- If he wanted to confirm some event or message, he should highlight it by clearly predicting it well before it happens or by doing something that really gets our attention – something out of the ordinary that would otherwise be physically impossible.
- If people really observed this stuff, we would expect they would tell other people about it and someone would write it down. Maybe not everything throughout all of history, but at least some of the bigger stuff.
- If people really believed this stuff, and that God was really responsible for it, they should be willing to stand up for it, even if faced with harsh criticism and deadly consequences.
- Since these writings record the history of mankind and the expectations and plans of God, we would expect several copies would be maintained. After all, this stuff is important.
- If this is the real history of humankind, it should correspond with the evidence we find in the world. These recorded events and stories should not be found in conflict with reliable historical documents, archaeological evidence, etc.
This is a fairly comprehensive list that would satisfy the demands of even the most wanting skeptics. The amazing thing is, this is exactly the kind of evidence available for Christianity. All of these expectations, and more, are met in the recordings of the Bible. Each point mentioned above is worthy of study on its own.
The Bible
What is the Bible anyway? Is it just a religious book of rules? Is it the guiding charter of the Christian club? Unfortunately, the origin and nature of the Bible are unknown even by most Christians. The Bible is really a collection of ancient writings, 66 books in all. There was a period of about 1500 years between the earliest and latest writings.
With texts this old, what kind of documentation does Christianity have to offer that we have accurate copies? There is more manuscript evidence for the Bible than for any other document from the ancient world, and the contest isn’t even close. More than 25,000 complete or fragmented manuscripts have been found for the New Testament alone. Other accepted documents, such as those written by Plato, are supported by only a handful of manuscripts. The next closest to the New Testament is the Illiad, by Homer, with less than 700 copies.
Beyond the manuscript evidence, the events of the Bible are corroborated in other ancient documents, and the text is heavily quoted in ancient literature. Even if you don’t believe the Bible, it can’t be dismissed as poorly preserved. Take a look at the evidence for yourself. Investigate the age of the documents in relation to the events they record. Would you say we have sufficient documentation to support the accuracy of the text?
Does God Exist?
Agnostics find comfort in the middle-ground between the stubborn surety of both Christians and atheists. Sometimes this is the chosen stance of those who are genuinely unsure of the truth. For those who find themselves in this position, we hope the information presented on this site helps to provide clarity and move the analysis forward.
However, another portion of agnostics are shown to be especially obstinate, despite their official stance. They are perpetually seeking to be convinced, but make no earnest effort to make a decision. Remaining in a constant state of evaluation avoids the risk of being confronted by a conclusion, either by those who disagree, or by those aspects that conflict with their way of life. The uncertain middle offers the benefits of allowing the agnostic to remain intellectually superior and maintain a position that precludes being refuted.
Have you identified yourself as an agnostic? Carefully examine your motives. What evidence would you need to make a conclusive decision? The evidence is out there for those who really want to know. This site is here to help you find it.
God Doesn't Exist
Atheism is often presented as the sensible position of choice for those who subscribe to logic and science. After all, doesn’t science clearly confirm the atheists are right? In short – no, it doesn’t. Even though it’s popular to claim that atheism is based on science, and Christianity is merely based on a wish, this just isn’t true. Christians have a great deal of justification for their beliefs based on an abundance of evidence.
So many frustrated atheists have investigated the “false claims” of Christians, annoyed that the debate is still ongoing…..only to find themselves convinced by the overwhelming evidence for the Christian position. You are encouraged to investigate for yourself. Read about some of the converted atheists and how their intellect and commitment to atheism compelled their study, and how diving deeper revealed the flaws in their understanding.
Christians are not afraid of digging deep on any issue because they know where the evidence leads. Are you willing to investigate?
Is Atheism a Religion?
Here’s another question. Have you ever wondered why atheists are so passionate? If there is no God, no creator, no life after death, no authority outside ourselves, no real purpose for living, no explanation for our existence……then who really cares what others believe?
Don’t be too confused about this. Atheists are not without their motives. Their worldview not only represents how they observe and understand their existence, but also justifies who they are and how they live. Accepting that atheism may not be true also means that their chosen way of life may be flawed, they may not be the highest authority in their lives, they may be required to change, and for many it may put their chosen career at risk.
There are many reasons people oppose Christianity, including several reasons why people don’t want it to be true (including emotional, volitional, and intellectual factors). These influences need to be studied to make sure the desires and motivations of the source are not overshadowing the evidence. You are encouraged to look past the emotional impact, chosen lifestyle, and intellectual positioning to get to the real truth of the matter. This includes carefully examining the motives of others and ourselves.
Are Religions Really That Different?
Aren’t all religions basically the same, you may ask? While some commonalities can be identified between various religions, there are significant differences that exist as well. These differences cover a wide range of topics, including (but not limited to) the nature of God, sin & righteousness, life & death, heaven & hell, and the person of Jesus. These are not different flavors of the same basic ideas; they are competing theories that (by their very nature) cannot all be true.
Christianity is open to all people, but offers no alternative path. If Christianity is true, then all other religions are false. If any other religion is true, then Christianity is false. This doesn’t mean that all non-Christians are “bad” people. It doesn’t even mean that all Christians are “good” people. What it does mean is that according to Christianity, the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ is the one and only way to restore humanity to a right relationship with God. (See also: Atheism)
Christians Are Not Perfect
Isn’t it true that Christians have proven themselves to be a bunch of hypocrites? Unfortunately, yes, at least in some sense. Another question to consider is this: Is hypocrisy limited to Christians? Not in the slightest. This doesn’t make it right, it’s just worth pointing out the humans are flawed no matter where you go. Don’t let hypocrites keep you from seeking and finding truth.
While Christians are not able to live up to the ideals expressed, that doesn’t necessarily falsify the Bible or prove that the God of the Bible doesn’t exist. Certainly the moral and lifestyle failures of Christians can be a tremendous barrier to those who have their reservations about the authenticity of Christian claims. But failure to live up to a standard doesn’t invalidate the standard.
The term “Christian” refers to a wide range of possibilities, including recent converts, lifelong Christians, Christians with little actual knowledge of the Bible or their own faith, and those who have been taught wrong things. It’s tough to place the burden of sorting this out on non-Christians, but it’s a reality that must be dealt with. And to be sure, there are many dedicated Christians and churches who are committed to addressing these issues as much as possible.
The Real Motive?
There is a much discussion of tolerance in our culture. Tolerance is widely promoted, even insisted upon. But tolerance is not well understood, even by staunch advocates. It seems too simple a concept to warrant any further study than what is casually understood. But the real expectation is usually not tolerance, but rather full acceptance, approval, and agreement. This is not a reasonable expectation.
Those who promote tolerance are often the least tolerant, not practicing what they preach. Why is there no tolerance offered toward Christians, whose religious beliefs include clear-cut stances on issues as being right and wrong? If we only tolerate what we already accept and agree with, how tolerant is that?
What if you heard about a group of people being criticized in both their public and personal lives, called names, told they should not live out their religious convictions, and threatened if they persisted? You might be inspired to speak up on their behalf and defend their right to live according to their beliefs. But what if these people were Christians…..does it matter? Should it? Why are Christians excluded from defense of their beliefs?
Who Is Jesus?
How do we know Jesus was real? Was he a good person, a great moral teacher, or God? This is, perhaps, most helpfully addressed by C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity:
“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”
Science vs. Christianity?
The choice between science and Christianity is a false dichotomy. You are not constrained to choosing one and rejecting the other. Christianity and science are perfectly compatible. Unfortunately, many scientists have proposed a problem statement that inherently excludes (or ignores) the possibility of a God. When the allowable evidence is sufficiently narrowed to exclude some possibilities, that’s not good science.
The outcome of the search for truth should not impacted by the way we ask the probing question. The evidence should be evaluated regardless of the preconceived ideas about what type of results will be considered acceptable. When you read about scientific thoughts on Christianity, do you consider how the way the initiative is started can impact the outcome of the investigation? (See also: Universe, Nature)
What About Christians?
One major objective to Christianity is often Christians themselves. It must also be understood that, for a variety of reasons, many Christians are not going to be very helpful in providing justification for Christian beliefs. Wait, what? Why is that? This is the unfortunate reality: many Christians have not examined their faith critically.
They may have been taught that examining their beliefs was an inappropriate or disrespectful activity. They may have also been taught wrong beliefs and/or wrong rationale for those beliefs. This is a sad reality, not only for those individuals, but also for everyone they encounter and lead into deeper confusion.
Once again, it must be understood that truth exists regardless of the beliefs or explanations provided. Christians who hold true beliefs for wrong reasons do not alter the truth, though they may not be helpful in exposing it either.
Find a Christian who can respond to your genuine questions. Utilize resources like this site to get some direction to get started. You may even use tools like these to challenge your Christian friends to dig deeper to understand what they really believe and why. (See also: Knowledge, Truth)
Additional Resources
- [COMING SOON]
- I Don’t Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist (Geisler & Turek)
- Darwin On Trial (Phillip E. Johnson)
- The Case For Christ (Lee Strobel)
- Mere Christianity (C.S. Lewis)
- The Reason For God (Timothy Keller)
- Evidence That Demands A Verdict (Josh McDowell)
- [COMING SOON]
Feedback
- Suggest a Topic
- Recommend a Resource
- Ask a Question
- Provide a Testimonial
- Leave a Comment
- Other Feedback